Supreme Court: "Legal Professionals Acting as Agents for 'Personal Bankruptcy and Rehabilitation' Violate Attorney Act"

The Supreme Court ruled that if a certified judicial scrivener substantially represented all procedures beyond merely filing for individual bankruptcy and rehabilitation cases, it constitutes a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Ahn Cheol-sang) confirmed the lower court's ruling on the 12th, which found Mr. A guilty of violating the Attorney-at-Law Act, sentencing him to a fine of 2 million won and ordering the confiscation of approximately 2 million won.

Certified judicial scrivener Mr. A was summarily indicted in November 2017 on charges of colluding with an office manager to take on a total of nine individual rehabilitation and bankruptcy cases between 2015 and 2016, receiving a total of 8.2 million won. He contested the indictment and requested a formal trial.

The first trial sentenced him to a fine of 2 million won, but Mr. A appealed. During the appeal process, the Certified Judicial Scrivener Act was amended to include individual rehabilitation and bankruptcy within the scope of their duties. Mr. A claimed innocence, arguing that representing individual rehabilitation and bankruptcy cases by a certified judicial scrivener no longer violates the Attorney-at-Law Act as before. He cited the Criminal Procedure Act provision stating that if a law is amended after the crime to abolish the penalty, a dismissal judgment must be rendered.

However, the appellate court rejected Mr. A's argument. The appellate court stated, "It is an established precedent that if a certified judicial scrivener exceeds the scope of their duties by accepting a fixed fee per case for individual rehabilitation and bankruptcy cases, leading the case handling and substantially representing all procedures, it constitutes a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act."

The Supreme Court held that "The Certified Judicial Scrivener Act, which defines the scope of duties for certified judicial scriveners, is fundamentally an administrative regulation unrelated to criminal law, and the amendment of its provisions indirectly affects punishability. Therefore, the appellate court's judgment is correct."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.